Spell Scroll Generation and more on the to-do list…

Yesterday, I rolled out a spell scroll generator using the underlying 1E AD&D™ data handlers. Spell scrolls can be a pain to generate and I like a bit of randomness but in a constrained fashion. Thus, the spell scroll process garners a separate process from purely random generation of treasure.

On the treasure front, I requested and received permission to utilize the tables and information from the excellent Treasure supplement by Courtney Campbell of Hack & Slash fame. Courtney’s supplement uses alternatives to the standard categories of treasure. I do not plan to make a stand-alone generator but rather include the alternates in my AD&D™ 1E Treasure Generator (and perhaps the Labyrinth Lord™ one as well). The permission was granted with the condition I make no profit and appropriate credit is given. Not a problem. Mithril & Mages is 100% ad-free, 100% free to use, and has no intention of generating profit.

Finally, I received some feedback on the City Block Generator from Yendorma. The request was fairly simple: Add an ‘Everything’ style option to include all location types. I added that this evening. However, the entire process needs to be gutted and redone. The generator produces images, which was the purpose of a long dead collaborative project. Replacing images with a simpler output format should be easy…when I get the chance.

Updated 1E Treasure Generator

The 1E Treasure Generator underwent a few upgrades over the last couple of days. The bulk of the variable items are now automatically generated. A couple of minor bugs were also corrected that were failing to return treasure for Miscellaneous Magic types. Both were simple typos.

D&D 1E Treasure Generator

I finally finished the minor elements of the treasure generator. The form and function follows the general approach used in all the other utilities on the sight. Strangely, I started the project shortly before the recent announcement of the re-release of first edition to support the Gary Gygax Memorial Fund.

The generation process includes treasure by type, any magic, maps, or specific treasure class. The reference tables for the process are from the Dungeon Master’s Guide and Unearthed Arcana. Magic and spell lists use the U.A. table information.

Typos, bugs, and easter eggs may be present. If you suspect an error or find a typographic error, please let me know.

Stepping Stones: A Short Labyrinth Lord Adventure

Get Ready

A calm pool of water separates the entrance of the cavern from the exit. The tops of four rocky outcroppings appear to be stepping stones across the pool.

Get Set

The tops of the outcroppings appear worn down from the feet of numerous crossings. The first is narrow and almost flat. The second rises nearly 2 feet above the waterline. A jagged section of rock on the left side appears ready to break away from the otherwise rounded lump near 3 feet across. The third stone barely rises above the surface. Any disturbance of the water will inundate it periodically from the waves. The cavern stretches nearly 60 feet long with the of water covering the nearly 30 feet near the entrance.

The fourth stone is split in two. One half rises nearly a foot above the top of the water and is wide and roughly hewn. A worn path is smoother than the rest of the stone. The other half is a newer stalagmite ending in a sharp point nearly three feet above the water. The two halves are separated by about 18 inches of water.

Go!

The stepping stones are Ropers. Imitating stepping stones has been a beneficial strategy adopted by the fourth stone long ago. The first, second, and third stones are offspring of the fourth. Number four is in last phase of reproducing again: splitting off a seed which will sink to the floor and grow into another roper.

The ropers have no need to breath and will wait for the optimal time to reveal themselves. The ropers are extremely intelligent and will wait for two party members to cross successfully to the far side. Additionally, ropers appear the same temperature as their surrounds and can mimic stone formations at will.

Once the 3rd person hits the 3rd stone, the ropers will attack by lashing out with rope-like strands up to 50′ and attempt to drag the prey into the water. The first and second ropers will attack any members waiting to cross. The 3rd stone will reach upwards and attack the individual crossing and anyone flying or levitating above the pool. The fourth stone will attack the two who have already crossed.

Beyond the normal attack, if the roper arm succeeds in attacking, the party member will be drug into water. A half force doors check will allow the PC to avoid being drug into the water. Once in the water, the PC will drown in 3d4 rounds if he cannot successfully escape the arm and avoids being killed by the roper’s biting attack. Breaking the hold will eliminate the thread of drowning.

Notable NPCs

Roper (4) [AL CE, MV 30’ (10’), AC 0, HD 10-12, #AT 1, DM 5d4, THAC0: 11/11/10, SV F10-12, ML 8, XP 2,400, AEC 135, HC Vx2] HP: 65 (11 HD) , 53 (10 HD) , 56 (10 HD), 72 (12 HD)

RPGs in the Judicial System: Watters v. TSR

Fox News recently published an article regarding D&D in prisons citing the Geeks are Sexy Blog. The case was argued on September 18, 2009 and the decision ruled on January, 25, 2010. Old news but far from contentious.

The case in question was an appellate decision, Singer vs. Raemisch where the ruling was in favor of the Raemisch, the defendant. Essentially, in January 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a decision allowing the prison system to confiscate and withhold gaming materials from the plaintiff, Singer, who was incarcerated in Wisconsin’s Waupun Correctional Institution.

The judgement in Singer vs. Raemisch references a number in cases in favor of the defendant. Like many, I do not agree with the decision and furthermore, I do not appreciate the context of the quotes referenced in the opinion. I am not a lawyer and never will be but I can now read the cases referenced once it has become public record with ease.

Drilling backwards, one of the first cases against role playing games is Watters vs. TSR, Inc. Given the references, in Singer vs. Raemisch, one would believe it was a black mark against the industry. Based upon the opinion of the court in Watters vs. TSR, it is not.

The Watters lawsuit against TSR is a heartbreaking situation. Sheila Watters sued TSR alleging the wrongful death of Johnny Burnett due to playing Dungeons and Dragons. It was not disputed that Johnny took his own life. Suicide is tragic without question. The basis of the lawsuit was:

This is a wrongful death case in which the plaintiff appeals from an order granting summary judgement to the manufacturer of a parlor game called “Dungeons & Dragons.” The plaintiff alleges that her late son was an avid player of the game, and that it came to dominate his mind to such an extent that he was driven to suicide. She asserts that the defendant violated a duty of care in publishing and distributing the game materials; that the defendant violated a duty to warn that the game could cause psychological harm in fragile-minded children; and that the boy’s death, which was caused by a self-inflicted gunshot wound, was a direct and proximate result of the defendant’s alleged wrongdoing.

The appellate court’s opinion continued with:

TSR’s Dungeons & Dragons game is one in which the players assume the roles of characters in “adventures” suggested in illustrated booklets. These adventures, set in an imaginary ancient world, are narrated and orchestrated by a player known as the Dungeon Master. The results of various encounters between characters are determined 380*380 by using dice in conjunction with tables provided in the published materials..

The rules of the game do not call for the physical acting out of any role. The game is usually played at a table or in some other comfortable setting. We have seen no indication in the record that the game’s materials glorify or encourage suicide, or even mention it. It does not appear that the materials allude in any way to guns. Many schools and libraries use Dungeons & Dragons as a learning tool and as a means of promoting creativity. More than a million copies have been sold, according to TSR’s records, and this figure does not include sales by the several other companies that produce and sell other role-playing games

And again from the decision text,

The plaintiff’s complaint alleges that the defendant violated its duty of ordinary care in two respects: it disseminated Dungeons & Dragons literature to “mentally fragile persons,” and it failed to warn that the “possible consequences” of playing the game might include “loss of control of the mental processes.” To submit this case to a jury on either theory, it seems to us, would be to stretch the concepts of foreseeability and ordinary care to lengths that would deprive them of all normal meaning.

The defendant cannot be faulted, obviously, for putting its game on the market without attempting to ascertain the mental condition of each and every prospective player. The only practicable way of insuring that the game could never reach a “mentally fragile” individual would be to refrain from selling it at all — and we are confident that the courts of Kentucky would never permit a jury to say that simply by marketing a parlor game, the defendant violated its duty to exercise ordinary care.

With this, TSR was legally not liable. However, I must extract one more quote because it is notable.

Johnny Burnett was certainly one of the class of people whose use of the game could reasonably have been anticipated, and there is no contention that he or his mother, Mrs. Watters, knew of any danger in using it. (An affidavit executed by Mrs. Watters indicates that she knew the game was often played at the public library; that Johnny and his friends played the game constantly after school and on weekends over a period of several years; and that never, either before or during the period when he and his friends were immersed in the game, did Johnny cause his mother any problems.) But if Johnny’s suicide was not foreseeable to his own mother, there is no reason to suppose that it was foreseeable to defendant TSR.

This tragic case is cited in case law on too many fronts. Singer vs. Raemisch being one of them. From within that case, the quote is:

Watters v. TSR, Inc., 904 F.2d 378, 380 (6th Cir.1990) (describing a teenager who committed suicide as “a ‘devoted’ Dungeons and Dragons player who became absorbed by the game to the point of losing touch with reality”).

You are not bound by illusion, TSR was found non-liable. Still Watters v. TSR is cited as case law by the defense in the judgement against Singer noting he failed to respond to the prison officials’ assertions that there are valid reasons to fear Dungeons and Dragons influence on rehabilitation.

The prison officials pointed to a few published circuit court cases to give traction to their views. We view these cases as persuasive evidence that for some individuals, games like D & D can impede rehabilitation, lead to escapist tendencies, or result in more dire consequences.

The quantity of available case law to reference must be quite thin to offer Watters v. TSR as giving traction to the views of the prison officials. I fail to see how the case is supportive or relevant to the Singer case. My viewpoint is shared by the Court of Appeals in the Watter’s case:

As far as the record discloses, no one had any reason to know that Johnny Burnett was going to take his own life. We cannot tell why he did so or what his mental state was at the time. His death surely was not the fault of his mother, or his school, or his friends, or the manufacturer of the game he and his friends so loved to play. Tragedies such as this simply defy rational explanation, and courts should not pretend otherwise.

References:

Singer vs. Raemisch
Watters vs. TSR

Tomes of Antiquity: Tomb of Horrors S1 (1E)

Tomb of Horrors is one of my top-10 classic modules. It is brutal. For most, it is nearly impossible to conquer when played under the original rule set. Certainly, it was not typical of the modules common during the late 1970-80’s. Instead of following the purely random path of slaying monsters, Gary chose to make it a thinking man’s game. In fact, he states so in his introduction.

THIS IS A THINKING PERSON’S MODULE, AND IF YOUR GROUP IS A HACK AND SLAY GATHERING, THEY WILL BE UNHAPPY. In the latter case, it is better to skip the whole thing than come out and tell them that there are few monsters. It is this writer’s belief that brainwork is good for all players and they will certainly benefit from playing this module — Gary Gygax, 1978

Gary essentially stated that there are many ways of playing the game and experiencing a variety of them is a good thing. No single approach is the correct one. Rather, a variety of differing approaches is beneficial. I cannot argue with his logic. Kevin has recently been arguing Gary’s case.

Tomb of Horrors is a very short module. Using only 12 pages, Gygax generated more TPK’s than any other book published to date. If you eliminate the cover page and the 2 pages devoted to character selection, he did it in 9. Amazing. Nearly everyone has seen, played, ran or read the module in one version or another. The original is the only one I recommend.

Tomb of Horrors also contains an often overlooked element. The module has an Illustration Booklet in the middle. The booklet has 32 illustrations covering 20 pages. That’s right. The module has twice the number of pages entirely devoted to illustrations than it does to the actual text description. In fact, the module only contains 33 noted locations so the illustration to location ratio is nearly 1:1. Add in inside depiction of the entrance skull and the ratio is truly 1:1. I think Gygax would have enjoyed mixing media and probably would have loved DeadGod’s Ravenloft setup.

If you are one of the few who hasn’t played it, get a group together for a retro 1st Edition campaign. You can then join the vast number of people who love to hate it. Follow his character recommendations at the end of the module. Also, take note of his disclaimer on the intro page:

As Dungeon Master, you may fill in whatever background is needed, and if this a section of a campaign, players cannot have obtained the Legend Information without consulting sages, casting legend lore spell, finding the information in some arcane work, or whatever; all prior to actually locating the the actual locale of the Tom and then getting to it, so that background will have been accomplished. (When this module was used at Origins I, referees were instructed that the the hill had been found in the Vast Swamp, and the party had arrived there in barges). – Gygax, 1978

I’m going to recommend that disclaimer for the most run-on sentence in any supplement I have ever read. Apparently TSR didn’t have editors at that point. Essentially, I think he meant: Toss it at them. No prior knowledge. Make them think.

I wish Wizards of the Coast had never chosen to reprint the module. Sadly, they did so in a sequel for 4E. Instead of a true reprint, they took the fame and glory of the name and reworked it. Badly, in my opinion. True to their philosophy, they added more monsters to make it “balanced”.

Play the original. Under the rule base of the day. You will be happy you did. If you want to read a funny take on the module, you cannot go wrong with Something Awful.

Now we can commence with the TPK stories.